reptilesfandomcom-20200214-history
Forum:Names: common or scientific?
I know that a lot reptiles on the wiki are listed by their common names. But the common names can vary around the world, while scientific names don't. Which should we use? I know going around and calling them "Eublepharis macularius" or "Python regius" will confuse more than a few people, though. Is it better to just list them by their common names and then provide redirects if the scientific name is searched (or vice versa)? Styracosaurus Rider (Speak to the Rider!) 17:06, August 2, 2011 (UTC) :: My own opinion is that the scientific name is better and have common names redirect to it. For stability and professionalism. In the herp world what I have seen over the last 25 odd years is that for the most part most do know the scientific names of these species, or at least have no issue with it. However I will admit I have lost this argument before, and hence wikipedia has some real weird rules on this. Say a species has 5 or so common names, it still has only one scientific name, all those common names can have redirects to the one scientific name. So my vote is for scientific names with redirects to them. But I am only one person here. Cheers Faendalimas talk 17:21, August 2, 2011 (UTC) As far as I know, most common names are the same all around the world. I think we should name them with the common names, and, of course, use redirects from the scientific name. If there is more than one common name for a particular animal, just use the most common common name, and the necessary redirects. After all, people come to this wiki to learn about reptiles. I don't think most people even know the scientific names. MontagnaMagica|Talk 17:44, August 2, 2011 (UTC) ::Well actually most common names are different around the world and often even change state to state in some countries. However the MOS already states to use common names so which one to use will largely be preference, as the location of the author you use for reference will largely influence the common names they use. But we are here to follow the MOS unless it changes, we have to use common names unless there isn't one. Cheers, Faendalimas talk 18:37, August 2, 2011 (UTC) :::Yeah, I know a few lizards that don't even have common names, so a scientific name is the only option in that case. Styracosaurus Rider (Speak to the Rider!) 21:39, August 2, 2011 (UTC) And while we're on this topic...if we are going to use common names, I think it should be best if use the most commonly used name (or the one most well known), and maybe have redirects from other common names. Styracosaurus Rider (Speak to the Rider!) 21:39, August 2, 2011 (UTC) :Per the Manual of Style, you should use the most common name of an animal, UNLESS there is no common name, the common name is disputed, or the scientific name is used more often than the common. Take'' Uromastyx'' and Boa constrictor, for example. :And yes, common names are different around the world, but to be frank this is an English wiki, so we don't need to worry much about that. That or I'm misunderstanding something here, but I'm pretty sure most names are the same in British, American, and Australian english. Little changes like Blue tongued skink/Blue tongued lizard aren't too significant. They're called Blue-tongued skinks in American and British english, though. So maybe we could use that as a rule for dialect-variable names. If a certain name is more common in certain English dialects than the other, we could use that. Thesaurus Rex 01:43, August 3, 2011 (UTC) ::This being said, if you find an article whose animal HAS a common name, but it uses the scientific one, rename it to the common name and leave a redirect behind. Thesaurus Rex 08:40, August 8, 2011 (UTC)